‘Our membership is of no importance whatever unless it
signifies that we are committed to something of far greater and more lasting
significance than can adequately be conveyed by the closest association with
any movement or organisation.’
(Edgar G Dunstan, Quaker faith & practice 11.02, 5th
edition)
For a religious society without a separate class of leaders,
in which every Friend shares responsibility for the governance of the community
and its resources, membership has played an important role in Britain Yearly
Meeting. It has provided an opportunity for newcomers to make a deliberate act
of commitment to the Quaker community and to assume a full share of
responsibility for its governance and financial support. Membership has served
to indicate acceptance of mutual accountability for upholding collective
discernment, including faithfulness to corporate Quaker testimony. The
membership process has also offered a way of recognising and celebrating an
inner transition from seeker to ‘convinced’ Friend.
Over recent decades membership has become a contested issue
for British Quakers, leading to regular calls for its abandonment or radical
revision. Some object to the membership process on grounds of principle, such
as the supposed conflict with our ‘testimony to equality’ created by drawing a
boundary between insiders and outsiders, or the process of 'judging' who is
acceptable to become a member.
It has become common for people to attend meetings for many
years, and to take on roles of responsibility within them, while being clear
that they do not intend to apply for membership. As fewer attenders join, the
proportion of members has decreased markedly. In many meetings it has become
difficult to find Friends to fulfil responsibilities which require membership
(such as eldership and oversight), leading to the growing practice of
appointing attenders to these roles. This further undermines the rationale for
distinguishing between members and attenders at all, which increasingly appears
to be a meaningless distinction.
In fact we have made membership almost meaningless by our
practice of it. For several decades our membership processes have failed to reflect
a shared understanding of the core commitments involved in membership. Quaker faith & practice includes some quite clear statements about the application
process which may make surprising reading:
Membership is also a way of saying to the meeting, and to
the world, that you accept the fundamental elements of being a Quaker: the
understanding of divine guidance, the manner of corporate worship and the
ordering of the meeting’s business, the practical expression of inward
convictions and the equality of all before God.’ (11.01)
I suspect that in most meetings it is rare for any explicit reference to
these ‘fundamental elements of being a Quaker’ to be made at any point in the
membership process. Instead, membership practices seem to have diverged quite
widely between different area meetings. Some meetings might emphasise one or
another particular aspect of Quaker tradition (my area meeting asks explicitly
about acceptance of the peace testimony). Generally, however, the most common tendency
is to have little or no accepted standard for membership at all, beyond the
individual’s desire to join.
The consequence over many years has been that Quaker membership
no longer means that someone shares any common understanding of, or commitment
to, the Quaker way. As Patricia Loring has observed in Listening Spirituality,
‘the consequence of having no standard [for membership] is that the Meeting
conforms to the vision of those it has admitted.’ Hence, most British Friends share the culture and values of the liberal middle-class background that they
largely belong to, without necessarily having any common commitment to specifically
Quaker traditions, testimony or practices.
Renewal of our Society’s spiritual roots in core Quaker
practices needs a re-assessment of our membership process. All of the elements
of a more meaningful understanding and practice of membership are in fact
already contained in the current version of our Book of Discipline. They simply
need digging out and deciding to take them seriously enough to practice them.
Preparation for potential new members.
Our meetings could make use of the advice given in Quaker faith & practice 11.08 to
‘nurture and support individuals of all ages so
that they can develop a sense of belonging and an understanding of our shared
beliefs, testimonies and spiritual discipline.’ This could be done in an
intentional and explicit way to encourage attenders to become more familiar
with the ‘fundamental elements of being a Quaker’ (and especially our
understanding of core Quaker practices for worship, discernment and testimony).
This would, of course, require all of those involved in the membership process,
including overseers, elders and visitors, to work on exploring and challenging
their own understanding of the Quaker way.
At Sheffield Central meeting,
we have offered a regular series of talks and discussions on the ‘Quaker Basics’,
particularly intended for attenders. These are quite easy to organise, running
for an hour after meeting on Sunday, with each session introduced by a
different experienced Friend. The topics we have included are worship, discernment,
origins, testimony and community. Last year, we concluded with an additional
session specifically on membership.
Mentoring or spiritual
friendship
There is an important role in the membership process for
personal relationship with one or more experienced Friends, to accompany and
support the person considering membership. Our idea of how to help people
understand Quaker practices has often been limited to giving them a book or
leaflet, which is inadequate on many levels. Quaker faith & practice 11.08 makes reference to
the possibility of ‘special nurturing or supporting Friends’ who could
accompany potential new members, both before and after the formal membership
process, to offer supportive listening and sharing of experience.
There is already a model for this mentoring process in the 'Becoming Friends' learning resource, and it could easily be extended to offer one-to-one
support to any attenders who are considering membership. In some cases, this might
need to draw on Friends from outside the local or area meeting. Given the very
unequal distribution of Quaker numbers and resources between meetings, this could
also offer a way for larger and better-resourced meetings to support others
that are struggling.
Collective discernment
The practicalities of setting up a more meaningful and
helpful process for potential new members are straightforward enough. More
fundamentally, however, they rely on shared discernment by the existing members
of an area meeting, and agreement about what the core commitments of Quaker
membership are. In many meetings, this is likely to be the real stumbling block
to any improvement in membership practices. The current tendency is often to
try to avoid potential conflict by avoiding discussion about the requirements of
membership, or immediately abandoning any attempts at change as soon as someone
challenges them as ‘exclusive’. We need to have a deeper conversation than this,
one that is not afraid to question current assumptions about the minimal meaning
of membership, if we are to enable membership to perform a useful role in the
life of our communities.
What does Quaker membership mean to you? Are there ways that your meeting has tried to improve the membership process?
Thanks Craig for this very succinct summary of the issues around membership. I find that objections to membership generally spring from a misunderstanding of the Quaker view of equality, as well as a hyper-individualistic approach. When other people become members, I feel supported and reaffirmed in my own commitment to the Quaker community. Meetings need people to come in to membership, not only to swell the ranks of visibly committed people, but to provide an occasion for celebration.
ReplyDeleteThanks Mark - the issue around equality is important I think. My understanding of the Quaker way is that it is rooted in practices that recognise and illuminate the equality of every person, as a bearer of the divine Spirit, and a potential channel of God's loving purposes. The idea of a Quaker 'testimony to equality' is often understood instead as a kind of abstract principle which dictates that everyone is basically the same, and ignores the diversity of gifts and leadings that are given to members of a community. If we recognise that people can legitimately be led in different directions, then then is no problem of 'equality' in recognising that some may be led to commit themselves to Quaker membership and some may not.
ReplyDeleteIn Friendship,
Craig
Not only that everyone is essentially the same (which we are and at the same time are definitely not), but that we all have equal rights and equal knowledge and wisdom, which we absolutely have not. Power issues and people's inferiority complexes enter into this debate, which is going on all over liberal Quakerism world-wide.
DeleteThis comment is cogent:
>however, they rely on shared discernment by the existing members of an area meeting, and agreement about what the core commitments of Quaker membership are. In many meetings, this is likely to be the real stumbling block to any improvement in membership practices. The current tendency is often to try to avoid potential conflict by avoiding discussion about the requirements of membership, or immediately abandoning any attempts at change as soon as someone challenges them as ‘exclusive’. We need to have a deeper conversation than this, one that is not afraid to question current assumptions about the minimal meaning of membership...
If liberal Friends are good at anything, it is self-suppression of discussion lest it "offend" or become "difficult", so we are superb at conflict avoidance. And conflict means disagreement of any size, which comes from any difference, perceived incompatibility, challenge to the taboos of superficially disturbance-free boredom...
We are also challenged to "live adventurously" and recognize that our individualism has stifled most individuality and lots of diversity. The fear of discussion, let alone argument, leads to ever-larger conflicts. The ironies abound.
We must re-establish that the Testimony on Community, the requirement for Integrity, and the search for Unity in Equality demand we re-think this culture of ours. We must re-discover the Peace Testimony, which does not mean No Conflicts; it means Solve the Conflict! Talk! Work it out! Deal with feelings! Seek alternatives! Wait in the Light for a better way out! Fear of conflict --like all fear-- can only lead to the death of our Society.
Craig
ReplyDeleteNot a comment on this post directly but I understand you have some responsibility for Quaker Renewal UK facebook pages.
These facebook pages would be of great interest to me but I refuse to sign up to facebook. (I got myself removed from facebook maybe 5 years ago by threatening them with legal action if they didn't remove me!).
There are many facebook groups and pages I can look at without signing up. Requiring people to sign in to facebook is exclusive and means these pages are not truly public but for facebook users only.
Would it be possible to change the privacy settings so that content can be viewed without signing in?
Thanks
Trevor Bending
Brentford & Isleworth LM. (attended Sheffield central once!)
Thanks for alerting me to this Trevor. The privacy settings are on 'public', and I can't find any other options to make it available to people who don't have a Facebook account. If anyone can help, it would be appreciated.
DeleteIn Friendship,
Craig
I think Quaker renewal UK is a group[public] rather than a page. Pages are public to all - even if not signed up to Facebook, but groups need you to be signed up to Facebook. It might be worthwhile signing up just to be a member of a group that is interesting. At times my FB activity is just quakers and plants!
DeleteThanks for clarifying this Maura.
Deletea bit long winded to add a comment from another blog as a comment here...but here goes there is a comment Howard Brod that I found interesting [will quote below link https://throughtheflamingsword.wordpress.com/2016/03/03/gospel-order-four-types-of-clearness-committees/
ReplyDelete"A strong, grounded facilitator (clerk) of the Clearness committee is important to ensure none of the above occurs. I have witnessed disastrous results when advice is given, opinions are expounded upon, and judgements are issued towards the focus person.
In our meeting we trust the inner teacher so much that we started about twenty years ago treating membership and marriage similar to all other Clearness committees. For example, during a membership Clearness committee, at the end of offering open ended questions out of the silence with no advice or opinions also provided, the clerk of the Clearness committee simply asks the Friend if they “are clear to be a member of meeting”. The clearness committee does not make that judgement. The prospective member does. Then at the next meeting for business, the clerk of the Clearness committee reports that “Friend John Doe is clear that he should become a member of the meeting”. Instead of approving the membership (as is done in many, if not most Quaker meetings), the whole meeting simply approves the process used for membership. Questions may be asked of the clerk of the Clearness committee, such as: “Was the Clearness committee conducted in a spirit of worship?”, “Were no judgements, opinions, or advice given; rather, was Friend John Doe allowed the time and opportunity to seek the wisdom of his own inner voice?”, “Is the decision to become a member of meeting that of Friend John Doe’s, and not the ‘judgement’ of the Clearness committee members?”. If the answer is “yes” to these questions, then the whole meeting approves the process used at the Clearness committee. It does not approve the membership because John Doe has already done that in his own heart. If the answer is “no” to these questions, then the sense of the meeting might be that a proper Clearness committee according to our custom needs to be conducted with John Doe.
Eliminating a spirit of judgement of the prospective member’s worthiness to be a member is in keeping with the spirit of our whole meeting’s spiritual life – where we simply support the spiritual journey of each other without standing in judgement of one another."
All of our problems as a meeting and as a movement walk in the door on two legs. And so do all the blessings. I think this makes membership the most important aspect of our faith and practice to get right.
ReplyDeleteI yearn for what I call "covenantal" membership, by which I mean that both the applicant and the meeting look at membership as a binding set of mutual responsibilities and privileges, along the lines of that other all-important covenant—marriage. And the one thing that makes this a covenant rather than just a membership—that is, a religious agreement—is the promise to engage each other in our spiritual lives.
I such a religious community, the meeting invites—and expects—that the individual or family will bring to the community, not just their time, talent, and treasure, but their spiritual lives—their spiritual gifts, their leadings and ministries, their discernment as part of the meeting's collective discernment—and their love. And the new member invites the meeting to engage with them in their spiritual journey.
The life of the spirit is hard. We encounter obstacles. We find ourselves in the desert, in the wilderness, lost without direction, dry in that well from which we draw to contribute to those around us, to our meeting, to the world. In the life of the spirit, we sometimes run past our guide; we sometimes step through the traces—we screw up.
When these things happen, we should not leave our members to fend for themselves. But all too often, we do not even know a Friend is struggling! This is what makes membership in a meeting so valuable and unique and even personally transformative.
Unfortunately, many of our meetings (most?) do not understand the life of the spirit this way so they cannot define their role vis a vis their members in this context. The life of the spirit is not about transformation but only about comfort and renewal in the face of modern life. Religion is a haven, not a crucible, even though life itself is no haven, but a crucible. Religion is about escape from its heat rather than a way to refine one's soul.
So I think the problem is not so much our definition of membership as our definition of the life of the spirit. If the spiritual life is just about comfort, then a meeting does not need to differentiate between members and attenders—all deserve comfort and renewal. But you should ask for and choose to engage with each other in the utterly intimate project of the transformative spiritual life.
Thank you Steven, for this beautiful and profound reflection.
Delete